If you didn’t read about it in a recent Wall Street Journal article, Chrysler is:

…working on a plan to make the soccer-mom minivan more macho, turning it into something even dad wouldn’t mind driving. Chrysler is calling it the “man van”—a special version of its Dodge Grand Caravan—and it is expected to appear at dealerships and be available for orders within the next few months, according to several auto dealers briefed on the matter.

What you didn’t read about are the options that are either still on Chrysler’s drawing board or that have been rejected–not by focus groups in which they were roundly praised–but by Chrysler’s internal Political Correctness Task Force.  Bobservations has received a copy of these alternately inspired/dubious features:

• Placebo Remote Control: Doesn’t do anything, but just feels good in a man’s hands.
• Cone of Silence: Stifles unwanted small talk and chitchat from wives and other females.
• Built-in Seat Back Waxer: Ride shirtless and the specially equipped driver’s seat will pluck your back while you drive.
• GPS Override/Scrambler: Based on the Madison Avenue/female-driven myth that men don’t think they need directions.
  
• Headrest Beer Funnel (with optional Cooler): Featuring lightning quick hose retraction in case you’re pulled over.
• Backseat Weber Grill with Voice Activated Stoking: Feed the gang or just yourself on the go or at the tailgate party.
• Fold-Out Rear Gate Poker Table with ATM: Perfect for all night gaming while on the move.
• Pull-Out Viagra Dispenser: Discreetly get your dosage on the way home when you think you might get lucky.
  
• Man Boob Stabilizer: Elastic strap wraps across your chest to keep man boobs from jiggling when you hit potholes.
• Front, Rear and Rooftop Spoilers: They’re non-functional but look bad-ass.
  
• Porn: No explanation needed.

While the name of this male-oriented minivan has not yet been finalized, Bobservations has learned that monikers under consideration include:

• Chrysler Machismo
• The MascuLiner
• The Gruff
• Chrysler TestosterVan
• The Holmes
• Chrysler ViriliTrak
• The Chrysler XL (Extra Long)

June 25, 2010
Categories: Uncategorized . . Author: boblondon . Comments: Leave a Comment

Apple CEO’s narcissistic perspective is a ‘tell’ on Apple’s single point of failure.

By Bob London

I was reading the Steve Jobs interview in the wrap up edition of the Wall Street Journal’s “AllThingsD” conference (http://bit.ly/cfJLdq) when something struck me.  It was the culmination of a nagging feeling I’ve had about Apple for awhile—that despite its glorious success, it’s string of home runs and triples, there was something fundamentally short-term or un-scalable about the company.

I went back and reread the article.  And then I started counting…how many times did Steve Jobs use the first-person singular (“I”), when he could have said, “Apple,” “our team,” “we,” or “our”?

Let me save you the trouble of counting: While answering 11 questions, Mr. Jobs used the first-person singular (I, I’ll, I’m or my) a total of 30 times.  Granted he did say, “we” another 34 times–but it was the “I’s” that struck me.  Here are some excerpts:

• “I actually started on the tablet first.”
• “I had this idea to get rid of the keyboard.”
• “I asked our folks, ‘Could we come up with a multitouch display that we could type on?’”
• “I thought, ‘My God, we can build a phone out of this.’”
• “I put the tablet project on the shelf, because the phone was more important.”

So he makes no effort to conceal what we all know (but also know he should be fixing): that he is the chief decider, designer, prioritizer, and probably executive chef of the Apple employee cafeteria.  He’s the end all be all…the man with the golden touch when it comes to smooth, rounded electronics.

Now this may not be a pressing emergency as long as all systems–that would include Mr. Jobs’ recently transplanted liver–are working just fine.   But shouldn’t investors be concerned when Mr. Jobs’ narcissism and arrogance—the same traits by the way that help his company deliver stunning products—come across so blatantly while there is no visible succession plan?  Isn’t it alarming that he doesn’t have the “ear” to hear himself saying I, me, my over and over?  It goes without saying that no one else will point this out to him.

Just to make sure I wasn’t judging Mr. Jobs in a vacuum, I compared his Narcissism Index (# of first person, singular references divided by number of questions answered) to that of three other AllThingsD interviewees: James Cameron, film director and media force extraordinaire; Facebook wunderkind Mark Zuckerberg; and the tag team of Microsoft’s Steve Ballmer and Ray Ozzie who were interviewed together.  Here are the results:

My careful analysis shows that Mr. Jobs’ Narcissism Index is the highest (worst).  The only person who comes close is Cameron, who can rightly claim that he is the show, the whole show and nothing but the show in his epic productions—not to mention that he arguably needs a monstrously self-important worldview to stay on top in Hollywood’s notorious 24 x 7 ego-fest.

So, Mr. Jobs, your dangerously I-me-my complex is larger (worse) than that of the biggest Hollywood player.  Not a great thing for a company like Apple that will rely on collaboration and bench strength to succeed into the next decade and beyond.

Bob London is President of London, Ink, a marketing and communicatonis consulting firm based in the Washington, DC area.  He can be reached at bob@londonink.com.

June 15, 2010
Categories: Uncategorized . . Author: boblondon . Comments: 3 Comments

We all know about the so-called honeymoon period in business: the time at the beginning of a new job when an executive can sit back and absorb and assess the way things work, who the power players are and where the bodies are buried–without being expected to make any great decisions or pronouncements. It’s a no-fault grace period which can last as long as several months depending on the role and company.

But there’s another less-talked about phase executives can leverage to their advantage: the Blame Window. This is the period during which you can hold your predecessor responsible for the challenges you are now facing.

One might naturally ask, as I did, how long after you’ve assumed a new role can you blame your predecessor? And how would one go about throwing him or her under the bus?

My research yielded no credible answers to these questions, so I developed the following handy formula to help executives calculate their available Blame Window:

Here is an example–fictitious of course–to show how the formula works. Let’s say Bill S. takes over as CFO of a venture-backed start-up which has already raised two rounds of funding and is burning $75,000 per month with profitability two years away, soonest. After 6.5 weeks on the job, Bill discovers a serious flaw in the company’s pricing model that requires redoing the model–and therefore the business plan–from scratch. Bill’s predecessor held the CFO post for 2.5 years.

Q: Can Bill blame his predecessor?

A: Absolutely! Using the former CFO’s tenure of 30 months, divided by 2 equals 15, which is then divided by the 6.5 weeks of Bill’s tenure and multiplied by a Problem Magnitude Rating of 5. The result is a Blame Window of 11.4 weeks. Since Bill discovered the error in under seven weeks, he can throw the former CFO right under the old Greyhound.

Caution: this formula can be dangerous if not used judiciously. Here are some important tips to remember:

First, make sure you get the math right. There is nothing more embarrassing than miscalculating the Blame Window and having the whole situation blow up in your face. Set some reminders in Outlook 90, 60, 30 and 7 days prior to the expiration of the Blame Window so you will know when to stop blaming your predecessor.

Second, do your homework before you start laying on the criticism. Was your predecessor revered or scorned? Respected or tolerated? Make sure to get these and other data points before you start spraying around accusations. The last thing you want to do is tear into someone who is a company legend or, worse, someone who is deceased.

Third, make sure to select the right way of broaching the subject with your superiors. Here are some preambles to get you started:

• Jocular: “Gee, if I’d known all this before I would have asked for a lot more money, ha-ha-ha!”
• Nothing Personal, Just Business: “I’m sure <name of predecessor> was a good guy, but…”
• Delicate but Direct: “I don’t want to cast aspersions on anyone, but now that I’ve gotten my feet wet…”
• Mildly Annoyed: “I have to tell you I’m not sure what I’ve gotten myself into here…”
• Threatening: “If you think I’m going to take the fall for any of this, you can just find yourself another CFO.”

June 9, 2010
Categories: Uncategorized . . Author: boblondon . Comments: 2 Comments

Unemployed law school grads, Swiffers in hand, leap at chance to earn a few bucks.

Washington, DC – June 8, 2010  Expecting record attendance at tonight’s debut of pitching phenom Stephen Strasberg, the Washington Nationals have hired dozens of temporary workers to remove extensive cobwebs from the thousands of seats that have never been used since the stadium opened in March of 2008.

June 8, 2010
Categories: Uncategorized . . Author: boblondon . Comments: Leave a Comment